MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979817555 · doi:10.32964/tj15.7.479

Effects of added materials on black liquor combustion

2016· article· en· W2979817555 on OpenAlex
Liming Zhao, DANIELLY CORTES, Honghi Tran

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTAPPI Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLignin and Wood Chemistry
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFPInnovations
KeywordsBlack liquorKraft processWaste managementPulp and paper industryCombustionSawdustPulp (tooth)Kraft paperMother liquorPulp millChemistryCombustorEngineeringLigninOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Black liquor is often mixed with various types of materials before being burned in a recovery boiler to meet specific needs of kraft pulp mills. A systematic study was conducted using a thermogravimetric combustor to examine how added materials might affect the combustion behavior of black liquors obtained from several pulp mills. The results show that adding soap, caustic, white liquor, and sawdust significantly reduces the liquor swelling tendency, thereby requiring a longer time for the liquor to burn completely. Adding makeup saltcake, precipitator ash, sodium sulfate, and biosludge, on the other hand, has little or no effect on the liquor combustion behavior.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.176 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it